Re: [gentoo-user] Re: -Os = Nono?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:57:06 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote: I haven't measured it for IA32, but for a couple other architectures I have, and -Os generated consistently larger code than -O2. Using -O3 ballooned up to be quite a bit larger than both -Os and -O2, but if you're worried about size, -O2 usually seems to be the best choice. I've just tried it on a few PPC packages and, on balance, there was a small space saving, although it was hardly enough to get excited about. -- Neil Bothwick There is absolutely no substitute for a genuine lack of preparation. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: -Os = Nono?
On 2007-07-23, Zsitvai János [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you actually measured the gain? Emerge some thing with Os, qsize the package, emerge it with O2, qsize again? I went back to O2 from Os when it became apparent that the resulting binaries were actually _larger_. On every single package I tried. I haven't measured it for IA32, but for a couple other architectures I have, and -Os generated consistently larger code than -O2. Using -O3 ballooned up to be quite a bit larger than both -Os and -O2, but if you're worried about size, -O2 usually seems to be the best choice. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! ... this must be what at it's like to be a COLLEGE visi.comGRADUATE!! -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
